Despite there being provided VS2010 projects for LibOVRKernel, the code itself utilizes language features/standard libraries that require VS2012 or later. Specifically, std::atomic, the use of enum class, the use of variadic templates (template<typename...>, which requires VS2013 IIRC), and the use of <filesystem>. This appears to be confined to the Logging system, and probably wouldn't be very hard to rectify aside from the variadic templates.LibOVR builds without issues in VS2010.I'm hoping to get by without needing to build LibOVRKernel at this release (I've needed it for utilizing a custom memory allocator in previous releases), but that's a subject for a different post.

Including kernel-headers only worked fine for me in VS2010 buid. But don't forget to remove the unused files from LibOVR-Project itself, or it will rebuild every time

Yes, but I'm specifically talking about re-building the LibOVRKernel project libs, so that they can be linked to and used from my project. For now I'm just avoiding the problem and not using LibOVRKernel directly (it's not of use to me since the custom allocator initialization was removed).And while I'm also quite happy that VStudio2010 is still being supported, it is becoming the case that projects are dropping support for it (it is 6 years old, with 3 newer versions available). So it's not unreasonable to say "You need 2013 or better for building LibOVRKernel".

What is LibOVRKernel good for? I don't need it at all and compile everything including LibOVR. I mean does it give you some special low level commands or something?

A few SDK versions ago one needed to link to it to define/use a custom allocator and/or use the old logging object (which meant if you wanted debug versions of the lib, you had to build it). Also needed to use the lower-level system interfaces (OVR::System::Init, etc.).Since the logging has migrated to the function pointer init param, and the custom allocator has gone MIA, I currently don't have a need for it. But if you need to mess around with any of those low-level interfaces you'd need the lib. For the vast majority of people, I'd surmise LibOVR is the only thing you'd need (and is the "real" dev-facing interface).

Thank you, really wondered what LibOVRKernel is good for, since there seems to be nearly no documentation on it. Thought you might just think you would need to compile it. I remember std::atomic was a pain to compile when it appeared in the headers and I had to compile a .NET wrapper for LibOVR...

SDK 1.3.0 LibOVRKernel does not build in Visual Studio 2010

11 Replies

thewhiteambit
Adventurer
10 years ago
Including kernel-headers only worked fine for me in VS2010 buid. But don't forget to remove the unused files from LibOVR-Project itself, or it will rebuild every time
sbdykes
Expert Protege
10 years ago
Yes, but I'm specifically talking about re-building the LibOVRKernel project libs, so that they can be linked to and used from my project. For now I'm just avoiding the problem and not using LibOVRKernel directly (it's not of use to me since the custom allocator initialization was removed).

And while I'm also quite happy that VStudio2010 is still being supported, it is becoming the case that projects are dropping support for it (it is 6 years old, with 3 newer versions available). So it's not unreasonable to say "You need 2013 or better for building LibOVRKernel".
thewhiteambit
Adventurer
10 years ago
What is LibOVRKernel good for? I don't need it at all and compile everything including LibOVR. I mean does it give you some special low level commands or something?
sbdykes
Expert Protege
10 years ago
A few SDK versions ago one needed to link to it to define/use a custom allocator and/or use the old logging object (which meant if you wanted debug versions of the lib, you had to build it). Also needed to use the lower-level system interfaces (OVR::System::Init, etc.).

Since the logging has migrated to the function pointer init param, and the custom allocator has gone MIA, I currently don't have a need for it. But if you need to mess around with any of those low-level interfaces you'd need the lib. For the vast majority of people, I'd surmise LibOVR is the only thing you'd need (and is the "real" dev-facing interface).
thewhiteambit
Adventurer
10 years ago
Thank you, really wondered what LibOVRKernel is good for, since there seems to be nearly no documentation on it. Thought you might just think you would need to compile it. I remember std::atomic was a pain to compile when it appeared in the headers and I had to compile a .NET wrapper for LibOVR...
jimwe
Honored Guest
10 years ago
See below...
jimwe
Honored Guest
10 years ago
Are the Oculus team looking into this issue?

I have presented the same issue here:

https://forums.oculus.com/developer/discussion/33067/sdk-1-3-vs2010-kernel-build-error-atomic-h-is-missing

Thanks,
/J
Pal
Honored Guest
10 years ago
This is currently a show stopper for me, since I'm trying to implement Oculus Rift support for a big VS2010 solution.
galopin
Heroic Explorer
10 years ago

Pal said:

This is currently a show stopper for me, since I'm trying to implement Oculus Rift support for a big VS2010 solution.

I would not be surprised to see Oculus ditch the VS2010 version soon, to support a 6 years old runtime and compiler is a lot of effort for a very few. The kernel lib not building on it tell much of how they care about it :)
jimwe
Honored Guest
10 years ago
Since there is a VS 2010 project being distributed with SDK 1.3 I would be surprised if the Oculus team just ignores this problem. Dropping support for VS 2010 without any warning would be very irresponsible. I have emailed their support as well - no answer so far.

I will wait a few more days for a resolution of the problem. If I hear nothing I will attempt to resolve it myself.